Opinion Head - The Times Of Central Asia

Viewing results 1 - 6 of 356

Kazakhstan and Serbia Strengthen Ties Despite Different Geopolitical Paths

Serbian President Vucic (54) might physically resemble Kazakh leader Kassym-Jomart Tokayev (71), but the geopolitical positions of Sebia and Kazakhstan could not be more different. While the Balkan nation – a European Union candidate since 2012 – remains in the EU’s “eternal waiting room”, the Central Asian country – a member of the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union – seems to have found a delicate balance between Russia, China, and the West. Those differences, however, have not prevented Serbia and Kazakhstan from strengthening their bilateral ties. Over the past six months, the two countries have been actively preparing for Tokayev’s trip to Serbia. This year, he spoke by phone with Vucic twice, while various Serbian and Kazakh officials held several meetings. On November 18-19, Tokayev finally visited the Southeastern European nation, where he met with his Serbian counterpart. According to the Kazakh leader, they discussed strengthening trade and economic relations and bilateral partnerships between the two nations. “It is essential that we develop cooperation. We had constructive talks and reached important deals,” Tokayev stressed. During his visit to the Balkan country, Serbian and Kazakh ministers signed several bilateral agreements. One of them is a 2025 plan on military cooperation. It is, therefore, no surprise that, following the talks in Belgrade, Vucic and Tokayev attended an exhibition of arms and military equipment at the Batajnica military airport near the Serbian capital. Indeed, military ties seem to be an important aspect of the Serbian-Kazakh relationship. Back in 2017, the two nations signed a memorandum of understanding in the field of military-technical collaboration. Six years later, in November 2023, Kazakhstan and Serbia inked intergovernmental agreements on military-technical cooperation, while in June of this year Serbian and Kazakh defense ministers discussed in Astana military relations between the two countries. Also, in September, Roman Vassilenko, Kazakhstan’s Deputy Foreign Minister, announced that Belgrade and Astana plan то expand cooperation in the defense industry. It remains to be seen how Moscow – Astana’s nominal ally in the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) – will react to Kazakhstan’s ambitions to deepen military ties with Serbia – a nominally neutral country that has indirectly supplied Ukraine with $885 million worth of weapons. Despite being in different geopolitical positions, Serbia and Kazakhstan seem to share the same approach regarding Ukraine. Both nations support the Eastern European country’s territorial integrity, while trying to preserve relatively good relations with the Kremlin. At the same time, they support each other’s territorial integrity, which is particularly important for Serbia given that Kazakhstan does not recognize the 2008 unilateral independence of Kosovo. In 2022, sitting next to Russian President Vladimir Putin, Tokayev said that if the right to self-determination is put into practice worldwide, then there will be over 600 countries instead of the 193 states which are currently members of the United Nations. “For this reason, we do not recognize either Taiwan, or Kosovo, or South Ossetia, or Abkhazia… This principle will also be applied to quasi-state territories, which, in our opinion, are Lugansk and...

Home Opinion Head Uzbekistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Opinions Tajikistan Tajikistan Business Economy Kyrgyzstan Tajikistan Opinions Turkmenistan Business & Economy Business & Economy Uzbekistan Business & Economy Turkmenistan Opinions Opinions Kyrgyzstan Business & Economy Features Kyrgyzstan Opinions

Risk and Reward: Why Savvy Investors Should Dive into Central Asia-Caspian Region

Central Asia-Caspian basin has long been a geopolitical chessboard — fragmented by conflict but dependent on cooperation. In an era of shifting alliances, political instability, and economic uncertainty, multinational corporations (MNCs) must reassess their strategies. While the region's challenges remain considerable, it also presents unique investment opportunities that should not be overlooked. Since the 1990s, operating in post-Soviet Eurasia has been synonymous with political risks. The Central Asian states have sought foreign direct investment (FDI) but face significant obstacles, including weak rule-of-law, inconsistent regulatory frameworks, and entrenched corruption. Yet despite these barriers, the region continues to attract international capital, signaling its long-term potential. Traditionally reliant on oil and gas exports, these countries are now pivoting toward diversification. Nations like Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan are strengthening ties with the European Union (EU) to balance their historical reliance on Russia’s energy network. This shift is opening new frontiers for investment, particularly in green energy, infrastructure, and technology. However, geopolitical instability remains a critical risk. The war in Ukraine has intensified uncertainties, with Russia, China, the EU, and the U.S. vying for influence. Energy security, once an afterthought, has become a central issue. The closure of the Novorossiysk terminal in early 2023, halting Kazakh oil exports, underscored how quickly geopolitical disruptions can affect supply chains, prompting companies like ExxonMobil to reassess their regional strategies. Yet this volatility also creates opportunities. The region’s economic shift away from resource dependence toward a knowledge-based economy offers fertile ground for businesses willing to invest in infrastructure, technology, and renewable energy. The Caspian basin’s strategic location, as a transit hub for energy to Europe, only heightens its importance in the EU’s efforts to reduce dependency on Russian supplies. For international businesses, this means new markets, sectors, and investment channels are emerging. The post-Covid landscape adds complexity, with digital transformation accelerating across industries. Countries in the Central Asia-Caspian basin are under pressure to adopt these technologies, which could drive long-term economic growth. Yet the gap between ambitious reform plans and their implementation remains wide. Regulatory inefficiencies and bureaucratic hurdles continue to hamper progress, presenting a challenge for foreign investors looking for stability. For multinational corporations, the region presents both risks and significant upsides. On one hand, border disputes, political unpredictability, and regulatory uncertainty create barriers. On the other, the region’s growing role as an energy transit hub and its emerging sectors, from green energy to infrastructure, offer promising avenues for investment. Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan, in particular, have been proactive in bolstering energy exports to Europe, positioning themselves as critical players in the global energy transition. If the conflict in Ukraine continues to escalate, the region’s geopolitical risks will undoubtedly increase. However, external actors — particularly the U.S., the EU, and China — are also likely to deepen their involvement, further reshaping the region’s economic and political landscape. The rise of Sino-American tensions only adds another layer of complexity to an already volatile environment. Yet, for companies that can navigate these complexities, the rewards are significant. Central Asia-Caspian basin remains...

Opinion Head Home Uzbekistan Uzbekistan Opinions Uzbekistan Features Kazakhstan Opinions Features Kazakhstan Opinions Kazakhstan Featurees

How Can Central Asian Countries Advance Democratization Efforts Amid Geopolitical Uncertainty?

On October 27, Uzbekistan held parliamentary elections, which, along with the referendum in Kazakhstan and upcoming local council elections in Kyrgyzstan, contributed to a global election year. In the elections in Uzbekistan, the ruling Liberal Democratic Party emerged victorious, participating for the first time in elections held under a mixed majoritarian-proportional system. As a result of the vote, the Liberal Democratic Party received 42,7% of the votes, securing 64 out of 150 seats in parliament. Voter turnout was 74.72%, and observers noted the organization and conduct of the elections. Leaders in Central Asia frequently cite the region’s volatile geopolitical landscape as a basis for more cautious internal reforms. This reflects a need to maintain stability in the face of external pressures. Historically and currently, Central Asian countries do not represent homogeneous societies. Additionally, increasing political divisions within society and among political elites are observed in almost all five countries of the region. Against this backdrop, escalating geopolitical conflicts on the global stage may further hinder the realization of major political reforms. Political Reforms and an Unstable World Order It's challenging to definitively assess political reforms in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan as either negative or positive, as both perspectives exist. European and American leaders often note the countries' aspirations for reforms and express readiness to support them. Therefore, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan effectively act as locomotives of political reforms in Central Asia at this stage. Under the leadership of President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, Kazakhstan has undertaken political reforms aimed at modernizing the political system and strengthening democratic institutions. A significant step was limiting presidential powers by introducing a single seven-year presidential term without the right to re-election, which should promote regular changes in political leadership. Kazakh authorities argue that the role of parliament has also been strengthened to increase its influence and accountability to the government, providing a more balanced system of checks and balances. Liberalization of the party system included simplifying the registration of political parties and introducing elections based on single-member districts, which should foster political pluralism. Steps were taken to increase citizen participation in governance, including the introduction of direct elections for village and district mayors and creating mechanisms for open citizen feedback. Additionally, a 30% quota for women, youth, and people with disabilities was introduced in party lists, contributing to strengthening gender equality. Under President Shavkat Mirziyoyev, Uzbekistan is also conducting significant reforms aimed at democratizing the political system. These elections were noteworthy for the introduction of a mixed electoral system, representing a significant departure from past practices. Under this system, 150 seats in the Legislative Chamber of the Oliy Majlis should be filled by two methods: 75 seats were elected through single-member districts (majoritarian system), and the remaining 75 were allocated proportionally based on party results (proportional system). This approach aims to enhance political pluralism by allowing both individual candidates and political parties to gain representation. The majoritarian component allows voters to directly elect representatives from their constituencies, fostering a closer connection between elected officials and their constituents....

Home Opinion Head Uzbekistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Opinions Turkmenistan International Affairs International Affairs Uzbekistan Features Kyrgyzstan Kyrgyzstan International Affairs Kazakhstan Kazakhstan International Affairs Turkmenistan Opinions Opinions Turkmenistan Features Features Kazakhstan Opinions Kyrgyzstan Opinions Uzbekistan International Affairs Kazakhstan Featurees Kyrgyzstan Features

How Central Asia Is Shifting From Russia Towards Turkey

For Turkey, a NATO member and EU hopeful, the Organization of Turkic States (OTS) is an instrument that helps Ankara increase its presence in the strategically important region of Central Asia. For Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan, the Turkish-dominated group seems to be a tool that allows them to achieve their economic goals, while also continuing to distance themselves from Russia. Although Moscow still has a relatively strong foothold in Central Asia, it does not seem able to prevent the growing role of the Organization of Turkic States in the post-Soviet space. This entity – whose members are Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkey, and Uzbekistan, while Turkmenistan, Hungary, and the self-proclaimed Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus hold observer status – has the potential to eventually serve as a counterbalance not only to Russian, but also Chinese influence in the region. Since its foundation in 2009, the OTS has held ten summits of its leaders. Over this period, the intergovernmental organization’s working bodies have also convened dozens of times. On November 5-6 in the Kyrgyz capital Bishkek, the OTS heads of states will meet for the eleventh time to discuss the future of the Turkic world. Although the agenda has yet to be announced, it is believed that the OTS leaders will seek to strengthen economic cooperation between its members. Currently, their major trade partners are nations outside the bloc. For instance, Turkey’s largest trading partner is Germany, Azerbaijan’s is Italy, while China has recently become Kazakhstan’s biggest trade partner with bilateral trade hitting $31.5 billion. For neighboring Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, China and Russia remain the most important economic partners. One of the group’s major problems is the fact that its members, excluding Turkey, are landlocked countries heavily-dependent on Russia and China geographically. Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan, as major energy exporters, rely on oil and gas pipelines traversing Russian territory to reach their customers in Europe. It is, therefore, no surprise that the Organization of Turkic States governments’ agreed in September to create a simplified customs corridor, aiming at reducing the number of documents required for customs operations and customs procedures between OTS member states. In other words, they plan to increase trade among themselves. According to Omer Kocaman, OTS Deputy Secretary-General, the Turkic nations are also looking to “continue cooperation to stimulate positive changes in their financial systems.” That is why the organization has recently launched the Turkic Investment Fund – the first joint financial institution for economic integration of the Turkic countries, with an initial capital of $500 million. Kyrgyzstan’s Chamber of Commerce and Industry announced on October 17 that, starting in January 2025, the Turkic Investment Fund will begin financing major joint projects in OTS nations. However, in July, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev said that the current structure of the Organization of Turkic States does not meet its established goals, and that its budget is insufficient for their implementation. In order to change that, on October 19, ministers of economy and trade of the OTS nations met in Bishkek to...

Home Opinion Head Kazakhstan Opinions NEWS Features Kazakhstan Opinions Kazakhstan Featurees

The Geopolitical Battle for Kazakhstan’s First Nuclear Power Plant

Nuclear power plants currently operate in only 32 countries in the world. Kazakhstan seems poised to join their ranks in the near future; but what does this shift mean for the energy-rich Central Asian nation? Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Kazakhstan has been a strong advocate for nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament. Astana not only eliminated its nuclear arsenal, which was one of the largest in the world at the time, but also closed the Semipalatinsk nuclear test site, where the Soviet Union conducted more than 450 nuclear tests over 40 years. Thousands of people in Kazakhstan experienced birth defects and cancer linked to nuclear testing. This history makes the construction of a nuclear power plant in the former Soviet republic a particularly sensitive issue. Nevertheless, a majority of the population in Kazakhstan is expected to support building a nuclear facility in the national referendum scheduled for October 6. But what comes after the vote? If the citizens of Kazakhstan approve the government’s plans to go nuclear, the country might get its first nuclear power plant no earlier than 2035. In the meantime, Astana will have to find a strategic partner to participate in the development of the facility. Building and operation a nuclear power plant requires advanced technology, engineering expertise, and rigorous safety standards – areas where Kazakhstan currently lacks experience. “As a result, the country will likely need to rely on international partners to design, build, and possibly even operate its first nuclear power plant,” said James Walker, CEO and Head of Reactor Development at NANO Nuclear Energy, in an interview with The Times of Central Asia. Although most policymakers in Kazakhstan would like Western companies to build a nuclear power plant in Ulken, on the western shore of Lake Balkhash, at this point the Russian State Nuclear Energy Corporation Rosatom seems to have the best chance of playing a key role in the project. In Walker’s view, Russia has a long history of cooperation with Kazakhstan in the nuclear sector and could be a logical partner, especially given its extensive experience in building and operating nuclear power plants in other countries. “Rosatom has been actively involved in Kazakhstan’s nuclear sector for years, including uranium mining and nuclear fuel cycle activities. This established presence, coupled with Russia’s geopolitical influence in Central Asia, makes Rosatom a strong contender,” stressed the CEO of NANO Nuclear Energy, pointing out that Chinese corporations are also very interested in the potential construction of the first Kazakh nuclear power plant. Indeed, according to reports, the China National Nuclear Corporation offered to build a 1.2 GW nuclear power plant unit in Kazakhstan for $2.8 billion, with the construction taking five years. Another candidate for the project is South Korea’s Korea Electric Power Corporation. The largest electric utility in the East Asian nation reportedly proposed building a water-cooled power reactor –using water as a coolant to transfer heat away from the core. Walker, however, argues that while South Korea has a competitive edge...

Central Asia Opinion Head Home Justice International Affairs Business & Economy Opinions NEWS Features

Navigating Challenges: The ICG Reports on Taliban Drug Ban and Its Global Implications

The International Crisis Group, an NGO focused on analyzing conflicts, has reported that “After the Taliban's severe restrictions on women's rights made the regime odious to much of the outside world, the narcotics ban offers a rare opportunity to work with the new authorities on a pressing issue for the benefit of all sides.” Drugs from Afghanistan are a universal problem affecting all regions of the world except for Latin America, with Central Asia remaining one of the main routes for Afghan drugs on their way to Russia and Europe. The so-called “Northern Route” passes through Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, then to Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan before reaching the Russian and European markets. Turkmenistan also plays an important role as a transit country for drugs, but on the “Balkan route.” The drug threat from Afghanistan to the five Central Asian republics is not simply a political narrative used by the governments of these republics for their own political purposes. There is a risk of political instability, criminality, corruption, social degradation, and damage to human health as a result of drug trafficking from Afghanistan. Additionally, the elimination of Afghan drug production and trafficking is a key issue in the fight against terrorism, primarily against the Islamic State, as drugs are one of the main sources of income for these groups. In April 2022, hopes for a resolution to this problem appeared following the ban on opium poppy cultivation imposed by the Taliban. Papaver somniferum, commonly known as the opium poppy, has been cultivated in Afghanistan since at least the early twentieth century. The history of opium production is detailed in the Global Illicit Drug Trends report by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). Besides the history of opium production, the report provides an overview of measures taken by states in their attempts to regulate and control the drug. Opium began to dominate world drug markets in the early 1980s, after the “April Revolution” and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, when the state began to lose control of rural areas, and agriculture itself began to decline. As the UNODC points out, by 1989, opium production was firmly established as the country's main source of income - Afghanistan had become a narco-state. The civil war continued, and the opium economy became firmly entrenched in the country during the 1990s. The first fall of the Taliban in 2001 and the formation of a republican government failed to change the situation due to the newly formed state still having no control over the regions. As a result, its counter-narcotics measures were not effective. It should be noted that only the Taliban managed to reduce drug production. According to the UN, since the Taliban's 2023 ban, opium crops in Afghanistan have declined by 95%, and opium prices have reached record levels. However, many experts wonder if Afghanistan will be able to continue with its chosen policy. Can the new Afghan authorities alone continue to confront the drug threat, and what should be the role of...